Thirlmere Activity Hub

20th February 2018: We have received confirmation that Treetop Trek has withdrawn its ‘Thirlmere Activity Hub’ planning application. It will no longer be considered by the planning authority.

We would like to take the opportunity to thank each and every one of you who took the time to write to the planning authority with your objections to the 'Thirlmere Activity Hub', to those of you that sent us such wonderful images (and paintings) of the Thirlmere valley, those who attended our rally, donated to our campaign and offered us support and encouragement in our efforts to stop this development.

We have provided a brief outline of the main issues and policy conflicts arising from this application which you may want to refer to. They are detailed below:

Conflict with the purposes of the National Park

Impacts upon the landscape character of the Thirlmere Valley

Impacts upon visual amenity

Impacts upon the tranquillity, particularly on the western shore of Thirlmere

Increased transport pressures

Impact on World Heritage Site Outstanding Universal Value.

The issue of precedent – if this development was approved it would open up the whole Lake District National Park and other national parks to inappropriate development

Introducing commercial development to an area where it was not present. Whilst this application does not include any ancillary commercial development we consider that it is likely that further development could follow on the back of this if approved.

It is classed as a major development as it is over 1ha in size (38.8 ha) and therefore should only be approved if it is of National Significance or is in the Public Interest

The policies below are contained within the Lake District National Park Core Strategy (the document used by the Planners to assess the application). At present we consider these to be the main policies the proposals conflict with.

Refer to Local and National Planning Policy – For the Lake District National Park this is The Core Strategy. The Core Strategy contains planning policies which guide development in the National Park. Planning Officers use these policies to decide applications. You can read the Core Strategy here.

List the policies which support your case and explain why this is the case. If there are policies that conflict with your views recognise this and respond accordingly. Explain what other planning issues you feel should be taken in to consideration (transport impacts for example).

The key document for National Planning Policy is the National Planning Policy Framework. Paragraph 115 of the NPPF states that, when considering development in a National Park:

‘Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. The conservation of wildlife and cultural heritage are important considerations in all these areas, and should be given great weight in National Parks and the Broads’

Consider the Public Interest – In your comments you can outline how the application would affect the public at large as users of the National Park. This could include the impacts upon the special qualities of the National park such as the landscape, the impacts upon tranquillity, the impacts upon access and recreation in the locality. For those who live nearest the development proposals the impacts are likely to be felt most acutely but the impacts will also be far reaching for the millions of people who visit the Lake District every year and who feel a connection with this unique landscape.

You may also want to raise the issue ofprecedent. If this development is allowed to happen in the Thirlmere valley, a precedent will be set for other lakes and valleys in the Lake District, and also for infrastructure such as this in other National Parks too. The application is of national significance because of these issues.

Be clear and courteous, avoid personal attacks and stick to the facts of the case – Separate out each part of your argument and support it with the appropriate Local and National planning policies. For example if you want to discuss the landscape impacts and transport issues in particular then have a separate section for each of these. End your representation with a clear conclusion which states your main objections.

No, we are not against zip wire development. We consider the most appropriate location for this type of activity is within forested areas where there is the capacity to accommodate the impacts.

There are successful zip wire and high rope attractions in the Lake District at Brockhole, Grizedale and Whinlatter, none of which we have objected to. Given that there are limited opportunities to develop such sites in the Lake District we consider that such development would be better placed outside the National Park.

We will only ever object if we feel a proposal for development carries a significant threat of harm to the environment. We objected to less than 1% of all planning applications submitted last year, so you'll see that we only respond if there is a significant threat of harm.

Anyone, regardless of location, can submit comments to the planning authority, the Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA). All comments are considered by the planning officer dealing with the application along with all material planning considerations. More information about this can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/determining-a-planning-application

The planning officer will report to the LDNPA’s Development Control Committee with a recommendation to approve or refuse the application. This will be debated by the Members of the Development Control Committee and they will make the decision to approve or refuse the application.

During the Development Control Committee meeting, objectors who have previously stated they want to address the Committee are given the opportunity to do so. If there is more than one party objecting the time must be split between all parties, or a spokesperson for the objectors may be chosen. It is the responsibility of the objectors to organise how they will utilise the time.

You can comment on the planning application no matter where you live (you don’t have to be a local resident). We have provided guidance on the issues to raise with the planners as well as a template to help you write a letter to the Lake District National Park Authority. You'll find instructions and template here: Writing a letter

Please note that this information should be used as a basis for your comments rather than copied. It is very important that you put your own opinions across to get your voice heard by the decision makers at the National Park. Let them know why you love the Thirlmere Valley and how in your view this development would spoil it.

United Utilities is the landowner and has given permission to Tree Top Trek to submit the planning application. United Utilities are not the applicant. If the application is approved Tree Top Trek would lease the land from United Utilities.

We object to the proposals for an Activity Hub at this location and consider they are in conflict with the purposes of the National Park (http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/aboutus/nat_parks_history). We do not think that the open countryside location is suitable for the proposed development.

Zipwires across the lake will have a negative impact on the landscape of the Thirlmere valley and also on the views and tranquillity of the area. We also have concerns regarding the transport impacts of the proposal.

We have previously stated that in principle we would support a sensitively designed cycle way. However, we do not consider that any potential benefits brought about by a cycle way would outweigh the detrimental impacts of the wider proposal.

The applicant proposing this development is Tree Top Trek based at Brockhole, Windermere. The company currently runs attractions at Brockhole and in Manchester. The company website can be found here : https://www.treetoptrek.co.uk/ and their dedicated page for the Thirlmere activity hub can be found here: https://www.treetoptrek.co.uk/thirlmere

Tree Top Trek has submitted a proposal for the creation of an activity hub at Thirlmere. The proposals include a zip wire attraction travelling across Thirlmere east-west on two aerial lines. Each line would consist of a quadruple zip wire (so 8 wires in total). The lines would be approximately 1000m and 1200m in length spanning Thirlmere.

The development would also use the existing toilet block at Swirls Car Park by extending this and using it for a reception base for the zip wire. This is accompanied by proposals to modify the existing car park at Swirls, alongside Dobgill and Armboth to alter the layout and accommodate additional parking.

The final part of the application is for improvements to cycling infrastructure around Thirlmere to create a ‘family friendly’ 18km cycle route.

Peter, like us, is opposed to 'Thirlmere Activity Hub' planning application and his blog provides an illuminating and sobering insight into the potential impact that zipwire development can have on an area, its character and landscape quality. Many thanks to Peter for taking the time to write to us.

Peter Knowles, Keswick, writes:

"Perhaps it would be helpful to share with members my personal experience of the zip wires that have been built over the Tara Gorge in the new country of Montenegro. This is widely regarded as “Europe’s Grand Canyon” and is part of the Durmitor National Park, which like the Lake District has been selected for UNESCO World Heritage Status.

"I first visited the Tara Gorge in 2007.It was very much like Thirlmere is now. There was a main road, a high bridge, a single parking lot and a restaurant. Tourists drove up, walked across the bridge, admired the magnificent view, took some photos and maybe had some refreshment. You might call this quiet enjoyment. No doubt a few were inspired to return for a future visit to walk and enjoy the National Park.

"I returned to the Tara Gorge again in 2016. Sadly, planning controls in the new country of Montenegro had proved to be rather lax. Four zip wires had been built across the gorge and there were now several car parks, cafes, souvenir shops, etc. The place was buzzing with coaches and car loads of tourists who had driven 3 hours from the coast specifically to do the zip wires. It was noisy with the screech of the pulleys, the delighted screams of the participants and the shouts from their friends – it reminded me of Blackpool Fun Fair when I was a kid.

"I returned again this year in June. It was even busier with lots of cars, coaches, traffic and parking problems. Another double Zip wire had been built - at over a kilometer long it was claimed to be the longest in Europe. Our group and myself had a go on this – and yes it was fun and a huge adrenaline buzz! Did it though enhance our experience of this magnificent gorge? Definitely not! Our group all agreed that the development, traffic, people and the noise that accompanied the zip wires ruined our enjoyment of this World Heritage Site.

"I should mention that I am a friend with Mira who owns the longest zip wire operation. Over a drink I asked him how he was doing and whether it was profitable - “Peter my friend – I have never had it so good – I think you say a cash cow?”

"I don’t think we can blame the Treetop company for trying to get planning permission – the potential profits for them are huge. However my personal experience and all that we know of Zip wire operations elsewhere (check out the internet) tells us that far from providing a “quality tourist experience” as claimed – I believe that it will do the very opposite and it will damage the future status of the Lake District National Park as a quality tourist destination.

"Like everyone else who enjoys Thirlmere, I completely agree with the Friends of the Lake District that this is would be a wholly inappropriate development in this location."

By Douglas Chalmers

The debate over the planning application to erect eight zip lines over the open water of Thirlmere is coming to head as the deadline for comments is on 12 January.

Friends of the Lake District has already clearly outlined the planning and landscape reasons why this development should not go ahead – that it would conflict with National Park purposes and planning policy, is inappropriate and so would destroy landscape character, visual amenity and tranquillity.

This is what it says in our official response, and what these technical phrases actually mean is that this proposal would deprive visitors to our National Park of the special benefits they currently experience for free.

Image: Thirlmere by Tony Stephenson

This is why I have been surprised and disappointed by the reactions of Cumbria’s Local Enterprise Partnership and of Cumbria Tourism. The LEP’s Strategic Economic Plan 2014-2024 lists “Vibrant rural and visitor economy” as a priority. Between 2015 and 2016 visitor numbers to Cumbria and the Lake District rose to over 45 million, bringing £2.72 billion into the County and supporting 36,240 full time equivalent jobs. Actual job opportunities created, bearing in mind that many people want to work part time, is over 62,000, 20% of Cumbria’s employment. Anecdotally, we welcomed even more visitors in 2017.

So when the LEP and Cumbria Tourism say that our businesses need greater visitor numbers, it is hard to argue, and yet visitor numbers are increasing already. Do we know why?

Perhaps a weaker sterling and nervousness over travelling has kept more people at home in the UK, but they then still have to choose to come to our County. And we do know why they do that. Cumbria Tourism’s own figures show that almost 70% of visitors come here because of our scenery and landscape, and that over half are drawn by the atmospheric characteristics of the area, using words such as “peaceful”, “relaxing” and “beautiful”.

And this is why the attitude of Cumbria LEP and especially Cumbria Tourism baffles me. I have been listening to rural businessmen across Cumbria for nearly 20 years, and to a man and woman, everyone has acknowledged the importance of our spectacular landscape in attracting customers. They recognise the value, the uniqueness of this place.

Image: Thirlmere by Tony Stephenson

So why would Cumbria LEP and Cumbria Tourism support plans that will obviously benefit one single organisation and yet threatens the livelihoods of many others by damaging the very features that attracts so many of their customers, and that gives them a unique advantage over competitors outside Cumbria?

Some may try to dismiss this as a spurious argument, but zip wires can be erected anywhere. We have one Thirlmere. Nowhere else looks exactly like it. We have one Lake District. It has a world famous reputation and is now recognised as a World Heritage Site. Why spoil all this, a prime example of how a landscape can benefit the local economy, to satisfy the business ambitions of one organisation?

If the Lake District Park Authority can ignore its own planning policy and undermine its status as a World Heritage Site, then nowhere in this country will ever be safe from inappropriate development again.

Douglas Chalmers

Cumbria Chamber of Commerce has written to the Lake District National Park Authority expressing support for the planning application for eight zipwires across Thirlmere’s open waters.

Image: David Mart

Rob Johnston, the Chamber’s Chief Executive, claims, “The economic benefits are likely to be substantial. It would create 28 full-time equivalent jobs, attract 127,000 visitors annually and boost GVA by £1.3m, so helping to “foster the economic and social well-being of local communities within the national park” – one of the National Park’s stated objectives”.

Friends of the Lake District is not anti-enterprise – we recognise that we need people living and earning their livings across the County, but this should be for the benefit, not at the expense of the landscape.

I can see how the Chamber of Commerce might see this development as a “big hit” of benefits, but this is surely a case where a single development will benefit one business, attracting a relatively small amount of visitors – but significantly and worryingly to one spot, paying a relatively large amount of money for a relatively short experience.

The effect on the landscape however threatens many other small, locally-run businesses who recognise that these dramatic, unspoilt views are a major contribution to what attracts their customers here instead of elsewhere. For Mr Johnston to say that “the impact of a zipwire would be trivial” i.e. “not worth bothering about”, is frankly disappointing. Those who love Thirlmere for what it is, and those whose businesses depend on visitors there, will no doubt disagree strongly.

This is not a debate that zipwires are wrong, but that they shouldn’t be erected in the wrong place. Cumbria Chamber of Commerce represents businesses across the whole of the County. Should they not be encouraging a development like this, not in a National Park and World Heritage Site, but in an area outwith the Park where there is a clear need for more jobs such as on the West Coast? This would also help to disperse visitor numbers over a wider area, spreading the economic benefits and diluting our traffic problems in the tourism hotspots.

Mr Johnston also says that this development would help meet “one of the National Park’s stated objectives”. What everyone must remember is that National Parks can only allow major development when it cannot be anywhere else, it is a national need and in the public interest. This cannot be the case here. Specifically the LDNPA Core Strategy includes “We want to protect visual amenity, including the skyline ..” and “‘We will support initiatives that reduce non-essential travel, especially car based visitors, over Dunmail Raise between North and Central/South East areas.

A zipwire in Cumbria may well bring economic benefits, but not if it is in the wrong place and damages the unique landscapes that sustain Cumbria and its visitors, both spiritually and economically.

Douglas Chalmers

Chief Executive, Friends of the Lake District

Last day before the consultation closes. Last day to make sure that we have had our say, that any points we are bursting to make are registered.

Of course, this is “just a planning application”, that is in a prescribed process and any decisions must follow planning rules. But even within the National Park and World Heritage Site that is the Lake District, Thirlmere is a special place. The birthplace of the conservation movement. The valley that links the North and South Lakes. A distinctive landscape in itself.

There are those who say that Thirlmere is a manmade landscape. Of course it is, just as the majority of Cumbria’s landscapes are. From the tapestry of colours and shapes created by our farmers and foresters and drystone wallers, through the historic bridges that look “just right” in their setting, to the distinctive buildings in our villages and farm steadings, the hand of man is everywhere and contributes to the majesty and beauty of the area. These all contributed to our being granted World Heritage status. Thirlmere is specifically mentioned in the Inscription.

Image by Christine Shaw

Some say, “Well, there’s a road and car parks there anyway, so what tranquillity is there to spoil?” Unless I’m misunderstanding the principle of a zip wire, it has two ends, and I cannot believe anyone could say that the tranquillity of the west bank will not be shattered by landings, transfers and take-offs from that side.

“But young people want attractions like this to bring them to the Lake District”. “We need to create these exciting activities to bring more people into the area”. Who says that young people only want this type of activity? How judgemental is that? Of course the thrill of a zip wire is attractive, but that particular thrill could be achieved anywhere. Young people also demonstrate their enthusiasm for walking, climbing, scrambling, cycling, swimming, and even sitting still and letting the peace and the grandeur wash over and soak into them.

“The County needs more visitors to support more jobs”. Absolutely, but let’s think where they are going to go. The Lake District National Park Authority wants “initiatives that reduce non-essential travel, especially car based visitors, over Dunmail Raise between North and Central/South East areas”. There are other areas in Cumbria, not necessarily in the Lake District, that are crying out for visitor spend, so why aren’t we encouraging projects that will spread visitors over the whole County?

Cumbria Tourism’s own figures confirm that the majority of visitors come to the County because of the scenery and landscape and the atmospheric characteristics of the area, using words such as “peaceful”, “relaxing” and “beautiful”. The estimates for new jobs, visitors and income for the zip wires are dwarfed by the existing (and increasing) 62,000, 45 million and £2.72 billion. Do we put this success and that of many other small businesses dependent on visitors, at risk for the sake of one company’s development and to satisfy the thrill-seeking of a relatively small number of visitors with plenty of money?

Image by Colin Barnes

For landscape reasons and National Park planning rules, this development should not go ahead. It would conflict with National Park purposes and planning policy, is inappropriate and would destroy landscape character, visual amenity and tranquillity. Cumbria County Council recommend refusal because “it is likely to increase the risk and danger and inconvenience to all users of the highway”, a risk they describe as “severe”.

This is not a case of environmentalist luddites against anything new. Zip wires are not a bad thing, but they can be erected in the wrong place. Across Thirlmere is one of these wrong places.

The Lake District has a world famous reputation. It now recognised a World Heritage Site. We have an excellent example of how a landscape can provide huge benefits, spiritual and economic, to residents, businesses and visitors.

Head versus heart decision? In this case, there is no conflict, and this proposed development should be refused.

This application is due to be heard at the Planning Committee on March 7th but rest assured we will be continuing in our efforts to keep this application in the public spotlight, highlighting the strength of feeling against this application and its inappropriateness in this location.

Latest

We have concerns about the limited extent to which the impact of the proposals on the landscape has been assessed and significant concerns about the process that has been used to promote and develop the Masterplan document.

In a world of fast pace and change and more external pressures than ever before, it is easy to forget that landscape is all around us and supports us. This is why we created our Why Landscape Matters campaign. We are asking people to join with us and remember why our landscapes matter to us, celebrate and enjoy them, and support our work to keep them special.